ORDER

KIMBERLY J. MUELLER, District Judge.

Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this civil rights action seeking relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate Judge as provided by 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 302.

On May 14, 2015 and on June 19, 2015, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations. ECF Nos. 209, 217. Both sets of findings and recommendations were served on all parties and contained notice to all parties that any objections to the findings and recommendations were to be filed within fourteen days. On June 24, 2015, after receiving an extension of time, plaintiff filed objections to the May 14, 2015 findings and recommendations. ECF No. 219. On June 26, 2015, plaintiff filed a motion for extension of time to file objections to the June 19, 2015 findings and recommendations. ECF No. 221. On June 29, 2015, plaintiff timely filed objections to those findings and recommendations. ECF No. 222. The motion for extension of time will therefore be denied as unnecessary and the court has considered plaintiff's June 29, 2015 objections.

In accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Local Rule 304, this court has conducted a de novo review of this case. Having carefully reviewed the file, the court finds the findings and recommendations to be supported by the record and by proper analysis. The findings and recommendations will therefore be adopted in full.

In both sets of findings and recommendations plaintiff requests appointment of counsel. For the reasons set forth in the magistrate judge's order filed October 22, 2015, ECF No. 240, those requests are denied.

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

1. The findings and recommendations filed May 14, 2015 are adopted in full;

2. Plaintiff's May 6, 2015 motion for injunctive relief, ECF No. 203, is denied;

3. Plaintiff's June 26, 2015 motion for extension of time, ECF No. 221, is denied as unnecessary;

4. The findings and recommendations filed June 19, 2015, are adopted in full;

5. Plaintiff's May 28, 2015 motion to stay (ECF No. 212) and plaintiff's June 11, 2015 motion for the court to put his transfer on hold (ECF No. 215), construed as a motion for injunctive relief, are denied; and

6. The requests for appointment of counsel contained in plaintiff's June 24, 2015 and June 29, 2015 objections are denied.